"Re-Branding" the Alberta Tar Sands

"Re-Branding" the Alberta Tar Sands

It’s always nice to get feedback on your work. That’s why we were heartened to see a comment fromthe Alberta Government on our post yesterday about the appointment of a tar sands executive as a “clean energy” envoy to the US:

David Sands of the Government of Alberta, here.

Mr. Anderson you certainly bring a lot of energy to your writing. While we can’t agree with most of your assertions, we certainly applaud you and desmogblog for promoting the discussion.

If any of your readers want a quick (12 mins, I think) look at what we are doing to address environmental impacts of oil sands development, we’ve got a new video. Real people, real pictures, no script. (“Conversation”) up at this site: http://oilsands.alberta.ca/

Thanks David. I did take the time to view the video yet failed to come away with any new information or insights that undermined my strongly held belief that the tar sands are an ecological nightmare, or that the Alberta government is doing much more than trying to massage their public image.

No doubt. Stelmach himself called their expensive Washington lobbying effort a “full court press”. Clearly he is worried that cap and trade legislation moving through the US Congress will hammer the tar sands by dragging Canadian climate policy (or lack thereof) into the 21st century.

Federal Environment Minister Jim Prentice fessed up as much in an interview today in the Globe and Mail:

“There are clearly measures [being planned in the United States] that would have trade-related consequences for Canada if we don’t have equivalent environmental legislation in place.”

According to the Globe:

“Mr. Prentice acknowledged that Canada would have to adopt regulations and enforcement standards “comparable” to whatever the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress eventually pass.”

It is humiliating that Canada, which used to be a world leader on matters of principle, will finally have to develop a coherent climate policy only because the US is forcing us to under threat of trade sanctions.

Mind you Premier Stelmach has his own humiliation to deal with. After years of demanding that the rest of the country get off their backs during the recently crashed oil boom, Alberta must now plead for $700 million in transfer payments from the Canadian taxpayer.

The bottom line is that “rebranding” can be a painful process. The Alberta government might have less headaches if they focused on substance rather than spin, and diverisfying their economy rather than waiting for the next oil boom.

Mitchell, Alberta never demanded the ROC “get off Alberta’s backs”. As a province, it has always been most generous with welcoming people coming here for work and providing many billions in transfer payments.

Alberta will diversify when the people who claim to be against oil actually begin practising what they preach. Beyond that, get used the tarsands.

An Albertan would not write: “As a province, it has always been most generous with welcoming people coming here for work…” without choking on the hypocrisy. Did you forget “eastern creeps and bums”? Do you know who made that comment?

And your comment “Alberta never demanded the ROC “get off Alberta’s backs”. This is false many times over.

Oh don’t be sulking VJ. A number of creeps and bums did meander into Alberta in the early ‘80’s. Alberta has been slagged by other provinces for decades; I’m sure eastern Canadians can take one mildly rude comment in return.

In addition to welcoming large number of Canadians from other provinces, we also, without complaint, pay the largest per capita transfer payments in the country. Alberta is a great province, I’m surprised you haven’t discovered that yet.

“one mildly rude comment”?? Liar; and you didn’t mention the name of the abusive drunkard who said that while he was a mayor before becoming a premier.

Alberta was a much better place when we had good leaders like Lougheed who governed well instead of the likes of Klein and Stelmach who govern very badly and waste taxpayers’ money on liars who pretend they are not incompetent, arrogant, greedy sellouts.

We have to keep in mind that in a video, you only see the tiny part that they want you to see. The stakes are very high for the oil industry and it is unlikely it shows the whole picture. Were there dead ducks on it?

I think according to the current PM, this makes him my intellectual property. I will auction him off for $1 trillion in american debt insurance derivatives of subprime mortgages, or a latte, whichever is more.

There is no doubt it is an environmental disaster but there is no shutting down the tar sands either. If the US were to quit accepting tar sand oil, other customers will be found. Economics trump environment in this world. I view tarsands the same way I view nickel mines. Toxic wastelands are accepted by the majority because they come with “good jobs” and “good jobs” seem to trump everything in the end.

While it is possible to trash the environment and rely upon the resilience of natural ecosystems to cope with repeated assaults, this is a flawed approach and ultimately doomed to eventual failure. Eventually, the ecosystem damage becomes so severe that collapse becomes invitable and when it eventually comes, the collapse often occurs rapidly with little warning. But by then it’s often too late.

Just remember the Grand Banks Cod fishery. The scientists warned that the fishery was being over-fished, was unsustainable and that quotas needed to be cut. The fishermen wanted to continue fishing and argued that reduced quotas would destroy their industry. Scientists soon realised that the fishery was in terminal decline. The government ignored the science, increased the quotas and the fishery collapsed. Apparently, the industry were removing over 60% of the adult population for several years running.

Sorry Mitchell, my “team” missed your post in response to my comment. I just saw it today. (By the way, there is an ‘I’ in team, in this case. Other blog writers don’t share the blogosphere scanning fun.)

I didn’t expect that all your concerns over the impacts of oil sands development would be allayed by a brief visit to our website (http://oilsands.alberta.ca/) to see a video. I hope you can return to find answers to some of your continuing questions. And, if you aren’t terribly offended, if I continue to comment on desmogblog where some of your readers may find additional information useful.

And please do visit our blog (http://alberta.ca/blog/home.cfm) from time to time, I am contemplating a discussion of the infamous oil sands vs. tar sands brouhaha.

Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.

There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.

Keep In Touch

As expected, President Obama today vetoed the Republican bill attempting to allow TransCanada to finish constructing the Keystone XL tar sands export pipeline. While the veto received praise from environmentalists, along with encouragement to reject the pipeline entirely, the veto provides little consolation to those in Texas who already have the southern route of the pipeline moving Canadian tar sands under their land.